The comments section was alive with talk of Clyde Dallas ( the poacher that killed two Federales back in the day ) and so I thought I’d cover the subject of “militarized police”. There is a tendency for survivalists to lean a bit towards Libertarianism, and as a result Dallas is usually viewed as a folk hero. I don’t view him as one, nor as a villain. I’m not sure why we are expected to choose sides. I admire the Hell out of him for being able to walk with those size brass balls, and that is enough to judge the man.
Libertarianism is a noble philosophy. But that is all it is, and I really hate philosophy ( other than from Nietzsche who not only kicked ass but who also might have had a better mustache than even Stalin which is saying a heck of a lot ). Most of its followers are so busy trying to be a noble god amongst men that they lose sight of day to day reality. “Why, I’ve got my guns and I’ll protect myself and I don’t need no stinking law dawgs to protect me!”. Well, ya kinda do.
What protects the banks giving loans to the gun company so they can manufacture your gun? And what protects patents so a company can stay profitable? And what makes the cost of securing the gun factory so low you can afford that gun? Government. Now, to be fair, most Libertarians do acknowledge the need for limited government, in theory. But in practice, they come off like a bunch of Anarchists thinking ZERO government is possible. I’m sure you’ve heard of the “zero gov” website, and similar ones. “You can’t be a little bit pregnant or a little bit free”.
Here is a good time to remind you of a previous topic, The Strong Man argument. A female, to avoid unpleasantness such as rape, murder or enslavement, grants exclusive mating/reproductive rights to a strong man who protects her. In effect, shorn of all pretext or bullcrap, she foregoes an amount of freedom for protection. You do the exact same thing joining a tribe. On occasion your life must be placed in danger, as a fighter, so that most times you stay safe. Your odds of death are less in a group, so fighting becomes safer than avoidance or fleeing alone ( I speak historically, not through a PA paradigm ).
As a citizen in a nation state, you trade some of your earnings ( some of your time ) for protection. As centralization always has efficiencies you cannot match individually, you are paying less for monopolies and force or defense is no different. Stop stroking the plastic stock of your poodle shooter and murmuring “wolverines!”, because while you are busy up in the hills being an Army Of One, you cannot earn a living down in town. Your effective tax rate as a citizen was 30%. As a “freeman” it becomes 100%, due to lost wages ( also, you have no customers if they are all enemy casualties ).
Certainly, a “rifle behind every blade of grass” is THE most effective way to defend a nation, cheaply. But remember how those rifles were produced in the first place. And I don’t think a private navy is going to protect overseas shipping to get iron ore to your local gun factory. Ever since the Agricultural Revolution, government has been a necessary evil. If you don’t have a Strong Man to protect you, you are dead. So SOME freedom curtailed to that strong man is an unfortunate necessity.
And just as your group needs a national government, so too does it need law enforcement. The reason that hunter gatherer tribes ( even if they engage in agriculture such as in New Guinea, rather than hunting, they are still at a hunter/gatherer tribal level of governance ) engage in so much warfare ( every other or third year compared to a nations average of from every ten to twenty years ) is because no one holds a monopoly on arbitration, backed by force. They use warfare as a substitute for police and courts. And while true nations have no centralized authority over them, it is too costly to resort to warfare usually.
If a bunch of Podunk tribes cannot settle disputes amongst themselves so instead resort to wars ( border disputes, trespassing on hunting grounds, failure of restitution of a Brides Price, unauthorized skirmish, etc. ), what do you think a bunch of Anarchist Yahoo’s are going to be doing when they get pissed off over imagined or real slights? Without a peace officer enabled with a monopoly on force to keep people from fighting, all you get is unending conflict. Even in a tribe, a council of elders comprises a peace officer function.
When you were a child, “wait until your father gets home” was a threat to call Johnny Law if you didn’t comply with orders. If you had a brother, all that fighting between you was to see who got dominance over the other, thus who enforced their own dictates. Anarchists are like Politically Correct Leftist Hooers in this regard, trying to deny biology. And it seems a lot of commentary on Clyde Dallas was firmly siding AGAINST biology. Evil FedGov Cops Have No Right To Attack Our Hero! A rallying cry to freedom!
That right there? Philosophy divorced from reality. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t care for FLEAS ( Federal Law Enforcement Agent’S ). They are never much better than bully boys which do not enforce the peace but rather enforce federal monopoly rule ( and yes, technically, I was a FLEA ). I respect Peace Officers, not Monopoly Enforcers. But that said, you don’t get to pick the laws you want enforced. You can certainly break the law, if you wish. A lot of laws are unjust. The draft, drug prohibition. But at the same time, you cannot take the governments protection and then scream Abuse Of Freedom when they enforce their laws.
Of course, this opens up a whole can of worms. Civil disobedience is certainly a valid tactic. But while you smoking a doob is fine, what about those Hippie monkey molesters running an Underground Railroad for illegal immigrants because they want Open Borders? How can you say one is harmless and the other harmful? In the end, that is what ignoring the law can cause. Foreign invasion and a conquered nation. Not JUST legalized marijuana. It isn’t quite so cut and dried, is it?
On the one hand, respect for the law can only occur in a homogenous justly ruled group. On the other hand, too much anarchy leads to outsiders gaining control because law and order broke down. No one wants to be ruled with an iron fist but too much individual freedom is just as dangerous ( we all hate Federal dictates, yet California acting as a Sanctuary State, ignoring federal border controls, opens the floodgates to White Genocide ). On the other, other hand, ignoring Federal gun control laws, AND state laws, restores individual freedom. It isn’t infringing individual freedom, but strengthening it.
Yet, that is illegal. So is drug use, even though the State has no moral authority to make such laws ( just as it has none to enslave men for military service to grow or protect an empire ). Where can you draw the line between Good Of Society and Good Of The Individual? It isn’t just black and white. While an argument can be made against militarized police, because that is less Land Of The Free and more Muzzie Religious Police, you could also argue FOR them, because everyone is ignoring the laws they don’t care for.
Okay, this isn’t really as much rocket science as I make it out to be. The nation has lost its Moral Authority once it turned against its citizens ( we could argue about when that was, but not that it happened already ). You are not thus honor bound to respect its laws. But I would like to look at things more from a law enforcement view, tomorrow.
( .Y. )
( today's related link here )Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page ( or from www.bisonbulk.blogspot.com ). Or PayPal www.paypal.me/jimd303
*** Unless you are in extreme poverty, spend a buck a month here, by the above donation methods ( I get 4% of the Amazon sale, so you need to buy $25 worth for me to get my $1 ) or mail me some cash/check/money order or buy a book ( web site for free books, Amazon to pay just as a donation vehicle ).
*** My e-mail is: firstname.lastname@example.org My address is: James M Dakin, 181 W Bullion Rd #12, Elko NV 89801-4184 ***E-Mail me if you want your name added to the weekly e-newsletter subscriber list.
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there
This one went off the rails in the 3rd paragraph and never came back.ReplyDelete
The people with the most freedom in this country were born BEFORE 1783, and it's been downhill ever since. Libertarian is the way most people live everyday. When was the last time you needed gov't? I thought I needed it once, but I was a dumbass, when my storage unit got robbed and I called the cops. All that did was get my name in the database.
Compulsory monopoly on force is not something I will ever need and I resist it with everything I can. I'm not against people organizing themselves as they see fit but when the option to walk away is removed it is nothing but base slavery, no matter how much lipstick you slather all over it.
Serious people, business or otherwise, NEVER rely on this sorry assed gov't, for every single time it fails. The only thing the gov't has is that which it has stolen from others.
I don't think we will ever see eye to eye on this one. Remember, I used to be a rabid anarchist ( not the stupid kind, like bomb throwing commies-the one that wants zero gov ). I am NOT pro-gov. But seeing the Idiot Brigade in action, I cannot believe 99 point something percent of the population is capable of living in an anarchist society. And I don't say that from an Intellectual Superior standpoint ( "we know what is best for them" )-I'm just as much of a dumb ass.Delete
Careful Jim, you are messing with many people’s sacred cow. No such thing as absolute freedom. At best, we choose freedom from certain things. Founding Fathers wanted a certain set of freedoms. Ask the slaves back then about American style freedom.Delete
One thing that never changed-those with the most money have the most freedom.Delete
"I used to be a rabid anarchist..."Delete
What caused the change, that you now believe "somebody" must be in charge of you?
When people add other words to freedom (absolute, american style, etc.) I bail instantly. It's a diversion.
What changed was just studying anthropology, evolutionary biology, etc. We aren't wired for freedom and individualism. Which itself is a byproduct of excess energy. What is an ideal system isn't realistic or workable. In a primitive solar energy economy, groups trump individuals. Following the authority of the tribe allows for war parties and population management, for instance. The reason hunter/gatherers and nomads are usually driven to the wastelands is because agriculture empires see less individualism and more centralization hence better military systems. Overpopulation can be a centralized system military advantage. Plus, the more history you read, the more you can easily debunk Libertarian propaganda. The Irish, for instance, were never free of centralized rule. There were still kings. Just a lot of them. It isn't that I don't WANT to believe, it is that I CANNOT, as the facts don't allow it.Delete
Thank you. My problem is that I have always had a problem with authority. As long as I harm no one I don't believe anyone can have any say so in anything about me. To do so is a form of slavery which I detest. I understand what you are saying and I mostly agree - for other people, not me. Other people get to make their own decisions in that regard as long as they leave me alone. I'm not, and never have been, your usual lone wolf. As you've said yourself, history doesn't repeat it rhymes, but make sure it doesn't dictate.Delete
Look, you are a fanatic, as I used to be. In the positive sense, living the gospel and trying to spread it. That isn't a bad thing. But it does blind you in certain ways. I wish more people were like you. But almost none are. I'm not trying to denigrate your faith, but to save you. You are surrounded by the forces of evil. You are already aware of that, but by looking through your freedom paradigm I think you might not be fully aware, or you discount certain threats. I was in your shoes. I share the philosophy even to this day. But I never REALLY understood the dangers of others until I began to understand how they are, verses how I thought they were. Really, I'm on your side. Peace.Delete
Well Jim, I have my ideals, and I have my reality, and they may not be the same thing. I don't underestimate the evil that harbors in all men. I think all people can be better than what they are. It's a conundrum, I agree, one which I can only resolve by avoiding people in general.Delete
Yep, avoidance solves 97.35% of all problems. People are just Bitches & Ho's.Delete
So, the take away from today’s post is:ReplyDelete
A: Too much freedom = bad, or
B: Never fuck with a dude named Claude? :D
The thing about Dallas is, that had he been able to stay clear of the game wardens for about another year, he had planned on going to Canada. Canada has far fewer freedoms than even the US does today, but it’s a huge country, with too few people to enforce such rules, especially in the remote areas. Had he made it there, he probably would have gotten away with his trapper lifestyle for many years to come. Timing is everything, as they say :DDelete
I hadn't heard about Canada. Staying in your safety zone...Delete
Claude Dallas emigrates to Canadians?
That could never happen. He is a felon.
Canadians don't allow felons to cross their borders. Besides, he was seen holding a gun.
Dallas would never make it through the years-long extensive immigration approval process. Obviously, people like him are undesirable. Reject.
Besides, I read somewhere he likes guns.
If he was approved by one set of bureaucrats, some other set of bureaucrats would grab him at the passport counter == because guns == and march him right back across the border into the waiting arms of fUSA Fish&Game officials-and-authorities.
Epic fail on so many levels.
There is no-way no-how escaping the long-arm of Jonny Militarized-Law.
* * * * *
This public service announcement proudly brought to you by The Bureau Of Proudly Knowing Everything About Everybody.
And no, we proudly do not resent the little people for referring to our hard-working civil servants as 'the tail-end of a mohammedan week-long crystal-meth LSD mohammedan fire-drill train-wreck dumpster-fire fueled and managed by mohammedans'.
In fact, it proudly helps us in developing our mission statement:
"Proudly protecting-and-servicing™ our customers through realistic community-valued connection."
Was he a felon from his first encounter, early 70's, over the draft? And, I don't think he'd have an issue staying there illegally if need be.Delete
Correct Jim. He wasn’t a felon at that point, and he was acquitted on the draft deal. I’d say it’s also safe to assume that a dude like Dallas wouldn’t have bothered with any “approval process” :DDelete
One of the things I remember from the original book was that he toughened himself up by under dressing in winter. He was in my area, so I can respect that. He didn't start all macho and big-balled-he earned it the hard way, as a choice. Something you don't see many survivalists doing. That ties in a lot with what he did, and what he could have down, such as wilderness living as a fugitive in Canada.Delete
“He didn't start all macho and big-balled-he earned it the hard way, as a choice.”Delete
Yep, that’s true Jim. He was born in Virginia, and was an avid reader (much like you and I) of western novels and pioneer manuscripts. He dreamed of this lifestyle, and it was what he wanted by choice. He had no experience as a ranch hand, but he was eager to learn. It was said that he had excellent work ethics, and would often head out early in the morning on foot, carrying several pounds of gear over many miles. When the other men were off drinking in town and the such, he would be honing his trade, or reading. The couple that owned the one ranch where he worked, thought of him as a son.
It was said that after he was arrested by the FBI on the draft deal, that he was treated rather poorly. His fellow ranch hands and friends noted a profound change in his personality following this incident, and he was never the same after that.
Regardless of one’s opinions of him, he was an interesting character for sure. He made a choice, and he stuck by that choice. I might just get the book, if it’s still in print, as many of the original Loompanics publications are not.
The original book is pretty damn high priced. Try this one:Delete
It only has one chapter on him, but covers others living free, and starts at $2 plus shipping for a used copy.
Thanks. I’ll check it out.Delete
I think it was on 60 minutes many years ago that the fish and game was sent after him because another trapper felt he owned the trapping rights to the area Dallas was using and did not like the competition. he got the senior game warden to go after him. This senior warden was known as a hard assed prick and probably needed getting shot. The other ranger was said to be a nice guy and made the mistake of going on patrol with the wrong guy who got them both killed. Was Dallas harming anyone? Maybe cutting into the other trappers resources? I don't see how it was that important. They could have just left him alone and let the other trapper deal with him.Delete
The prick game warden was ahead of his time ( as in far more locals are like that now ), an incompetent that was given authority, a cop wanna-be who lacked judgement from competence so went Full Retard all the time. Giving real cops a bad name. This is pretty universal in the FLEAS.Delete
Thanks Jim. I checked out that link for the 1st book, and in the process, came across a bunch of used paperbacks of the Claude Dallas book cheap. So I picked one up for $6 through your link.Delete
Hey, appreciate the Commission Love. I must have been looking at the wrong edition ( Amazon doesn't always group them together ). I only saw them in the teens up.Delete
That's a huge can of worms you opened Jimmy! Once a tribe gets over 166ish people, there is injustice. Its our nature. Hell, there's more white men in the towers of power then blacks or tans.ReplyDelete
Just as chasing skirts in our youth
I like mixing it up with the minions on occasion. Not to rile them on purpose. To point out the need for clarity of thought. You only get tasty BBQ as a result of slaughtering sacred cows.Delete